Tesla’s expansion path across the United States has hit some speed bumps along the way, as the electric carmaker engages in battles with entrenched dealership groups on a state-by-state basis.

That rocky road brings Tesla’s dealership feuds to the halls of the state Supreme Judicial Court on Tuesday.

The Massachusetts State Automobile Dealers Association argues that Tesla’s brand of distribution — a direct-to-consumer model that bypasses the middleman — violates state law. But a Norfolk Superior Court judge disagreed in late 2012, saying the law should only apply to manufacturers who already have relationships with dealers in the state. That judge ruled that MSADA and its members, including a few that signed on as plaintiffs, do not have standing in this case.

The auto dealers group naturally appealed, which is how the issue ended up in the SJC’s hands. The dealers, in their brief with the SJC, argue that Tesla's selling of cars directly to consumers puts the existing dealerships at a disadvantage because Tesla doesn't have the same costs or regulations that the incumbent dealers have.

But executives at Palo Alto, Calif.-based Tesla say the lower court judge did the right thing, that the state law being referenced was in part set up to protect manufacturers from setting up shops to compete directly with their franchisees. “It was not to keep a new entrant out of the market,” says Diarmuid O’Connell, vice president for business development at Tesla.

O’Connell says Tesla CEO Elon Musk also believes that working directly with consumers is more effective because the electric-vehicle technology is cutting edge and requires a knowledgeable sales force. To that end, Tesla has set up a showroom in Natick and a service center in Watertown; another service center will open soon in Dedham.

“We’re really trying to give life to this technology and we figure the best we can do that is to represent the technology to customers ourselves, not through middlemen,” says O’Connell, a Cohasset native who now lives in California. “We did not get into this situation with the dealers because we were trying to upend the franchise dealership system. We did … fid it pragmatic to offer these cars ourselves and to service them.”

Of course, upending the system is exactly what the dealers are worried about: They fear a potential precedent that could open the door to other challengers.

In other states such as Ohio and New York, dealers have fought back by pushing bills that would effectively ban the sales of Tesla vehicles. Such bans are already enforced in Texas, Arizona and, most recently, New Jersey.

In Massachusetts, it could take a few months before the SJC renders a decision based on Tuesday’s oral arguments. O’Connell says that if the high court sides with the dealerships, the case would then go back to Norfolk Superior Court. But if the court sides with Tesla, O’Connell says, the dealers would be left with no recourse other than to get a new bill through the Legislature to stop manufacturers like Tesla from selling cars here to consumers.